Memory task comparison
Memory tasks differ in material, order, presentation, response, and scoring. Choose the mechanism you want to experience instead of treating every level as the same kind of memory capacity.
Category
Memory task comparison
Published
Aug 14, 2026
Updated
Aug 14, 2026
Author
focus-game.org editorial team
In these browser tasks, working memory is an operational description: information is presented, must remain available briefly, and is then reproduced or compared while the task continues. The page can score that behavior. It cannot reveal a complete memory system or convert performance into IQ.
The most important distinction is what must be retained. Digits, grid positions, colors, simultaneous locations, and continuous n-back matches impose different rules. Their levels and percentages have different denominators and cannot be added into a general memory score.
A span-style task presents a list and asks for reproduction after presentation ends. Number Memory grows a digit string and requires typed recall in order. The achieved digit length belongs to that presentation rate, grouping opportunity, input method, and progression rule; it is not a universal memory age or standardized digit-span score.
Chunking can change performance without changing the displayed length. A familiar number pattern may be encoded as fewer meaningful groups than an unfamiliar one. Random generation reduces some predictability but does not remove strategy or practice effects.
Working Memory Test reveals grid positions one at a time and expects the same order. Memory Sequence uses a small set of colors that can repeat. In both, selecting the right items in the wrong order is an error because serial position is part of the rule.
A level may increase after success and fall or reset after an error. That staircase is a page policy, not a natural unit shared by every sequence task. Compare level only with the same cue timing, board, progression rule, and response method.
Visual Memory briefly marks several locations together, hides them, and accepts the target locations in any response order. The outcome concerns a set of positions rather than a presented sequence. Added non-target positions and omitted target positions should remain separate because they reflect different response mistakes.
Board dimensions, cell size, exposure duration, and whether the user changes zoom affect the task. A level from this page should not be compared numerically with a digit length or color sequence length.
At each step of an n-back task, the current item is compared with the item exactly n positions earlier. The site's Dual N-Back uses separate visual-position and letter channels. A position match and a letter match can occur independently, so the user maintains two response rules while the stream continues.
Hits are correctly reported matches, misses are matches not reported, and false alarms are reported matches that did not exist. Accuracy without those counts can conceal a response strategy. The n-level changes comparison distance and cannot be read as a number of ordinary items remembered.
A span page may report the last completed length. A sequence page may report a level and strict full-sequence success. Visual Memory can score target locations against omissions and additions. N-back accuracy depends on match opportunities across channels. Even when two pages show a percentage, the counted events differ.
Keep raw counts where available and read the scoring explanation before interpreting progress. Never average levels from different tasks. If a combined number has no defined rule, denominator, and validation, it is decoration rather than a meaningful measurement.
Repeated sessions teach cue locations, response mappings, timing, grouping, and recovery after mistakes. Improvement on the practiced task can be genuine while remaining specific to that task. Demonstrating transfer requires untrained outcomes and suitable control conditions, not only a rising local history.
Published reviews of working-memory and n-back training have found that trained-task or near-task gains do not justify confident claims about intelligence or broad real-world abilities. This site therefore reports page behavior and does not promise that Dual N-Back raises IQ.
Choose Number Memory for typed digit strings, Memory Sequence for repeating color order, Working Memory for ordered grid locations, Visual Memory for an unordered location set, and Dual N-Back for continuous comparison across visual and letter channels. Pick one mechanism rather than stacking every task.
For personal comparison, preserve cue timing, difficulty, device, viewport, input, and progression settings. Stop when the planned block ends. A longer session is not automatically more informative, particularly when fatigue or loss of interest changes the response strategy.
These questions stay tied to the visible content on this page.
Use these links to check the research context, measurement limits, and original definitions discussed above.
Journal of Experimental Psychology / PubMed — Kirchner's 1958 paper describing the task lineage behind n-back comparisons.
Perspectives on Psychological Science / PubMed — A meta-analytic review separating trained-task gains from broader transfer claims.
Psychonomic Bulletin & Review / PubMed — Reports that much observed transfer was task-specific, with very small effects for other domains.
Continue with tools that pair naturally with this page.
Watch an ordered sequence on a 3×3 grid, reproduce it, and review level, attempts, accuracy, and local history.
Start
Recall digit strings from 3 to 20 digits with adjustable display time, strict matching, spacing, and local best length.
Start
Repeat a four-pad color sequence that grows each round and review best length, mistakes, and average input delay.
Start
Test visual memory by recalling highlighted grid positions, then review accuracy, level, mistakes, and browser-only session history.
Start
Run a 1-, 2-, or 3-back position-and-letter task and review hits, misses, false alarms, and task accuracy.
Start
Read supporting explainers and practical guides.
Explain what browser-based focus test scores can show, what can distort them, and how to compare repeated sessions without treating one score as a diagnosis.
Read
Compare the rules, outputs, and limitations of visual search, Stroop, Flanker, multiple-object tracking, and sustained attention.
Read